There appeared in the Newsday of August 25 on Page 5 thereof, an article which I can only conclude was designed to defame and discredit me in my standing as a public figure and as a member of a constitutionally appointed body, the Police Service Commission. I have previously served the nation for several years as a member of the Law Commission and have served in various other categories as former chairman and director of Crime Stoppers T&T, a member of the Port-of-Spain Rotary Club, a member of the Trinidad and Tobago Chamber of Commerce and a member of the Ken Gordon Anti-Crime Committee, which since several years ago, recommended the imposition of a state of emergency as one of the measures which can be used to try to stem the tide of rising crime.
So for quite some time now, I have signalled my agreement that a state of emergency can be one of the extreme weapons used in the fight against crime. This is however a measure which must not be used capriciously, but must be used and exercised judiciously and carefully and with due and proper regard for all the legal strictures and procedures attendant thereupon. This attack in the Newsday, and ironically, it was the only media house which appeared to publish this story, seems to stem from the fact that I have been standing up and asking questions about the back-dating of the letter of appointment of the acting Commissioner of Police Stephen Williams and about the validity of the curfew orders even if the appointment was validly back-dated. When we are dealing with the liberties, rights and freedoms of citizens, we must always be careful to err on the side of caution and this is more so when one is carrying out a function in the public's interest as part of a constitutionally appointed body such as the Police Service Commission.
We sit there as independent persons who must be free to question, challenge and test things which are put before us, once it is done in the interest of the public. I therefore felt it a course of prudence to seek legal guidance on the two issues of the propriety of back-dating the appointment of Mr Stephen Williams and the consequent effect of the validity of the curfew orders which he issued before he received his appointment as acting Commissioner of Police. As a result, I have been in discussion and consultation with one of the foremost and esteemed senior counsels in the country on both these issues, but it appears that the mere fact that I have raised these questions became a source of tremendous disquiet.
However, I am not alone in asking these questions as Senior Counsel Kenneth Lalla was also on television raising the same questions and issues that I was seeking consultation on. Lalla is well known and well respected and he is also a former chairman of a constitutionally appointed Service Commission, so it is clear that while we may all want, and agree with a state of emergency, we must at all times be vigilant to the public's interest to ensure that we do things the right and proper way. It is therefore, a course of prudence to not advise one's self, but to seek the guidance of learned senior counsel on such matters.
I have since instructed my attorneys JD Sellier & Co through Ms Marcelle Ferdinand and yet another Senior Counsel Seenath Jairam, who himself is a former member of the Police Service Commission, to institute proceedings against the Newsday for the allegations and insinuations which are contained in their said article. But there is a bigger issue at stake here and it would be good if we were to canvass a few learned legal opinions in writing on the issue. Senior Counsel Lalla, in his presentation on the Morning Show, seemed to question the validity of the curfew orders made in such circumstances.
Are there other legal opinions out there on the topic?
I trust that the public will understand and appreciate the need for sober, mature judgement, thinking and discretion when dealing with such major national issues and would understand why it was a course of prudence to have sought guidance and advice from senior counsel. These matters have important and significant consequences for the nation as a whole and even if everything is correct, right and valid, there is a duty on us as members of a constitutionally appointed body to ensure that whatever we do in the dispensation of our functions can withstand scrutiny in the long run because we must always take a long term view of nation building and not just look at it as an immediate quick fix. It has been said that these are desperate times and require desperate measures but equally, we must be careful not to let desperation and the suspension of some parts of the Constitution cause us to feel that we should throw out the rule of law entirely and refuse to discuss or even entertain legal issues which may surround this present state of emergency.
It is of course, a suspension of some of our constitutional rights, but let's not let it also be a suspension of common sense, reason and rational and critical thinking because we must remember that life has to go on and Lalla's concerns and the questions I have raised, may or may not be valid, but the answer to this is not to shoot down the messenger but for us to get different written legal opinions where the matter can be dealt with in a mature, reasoned manner, through scholarship, erudition and elucidation on the issue of whether, even with a back-dated appointment, the curfew orders issued prior to such appointment, could still be valid and effective. This entire operation is too serious and significant in this nation for us to not want to proceed with caution.